Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

CTC Background and Development

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Colorectal Cancer Screening and Computerized Tomographic Colonography

  • 951 Accesses

Abstract

Computed tomography (CT) following laxative cleansing and gaseous insufflation was first described for imaging the colorectum in the mid-1980s [1]. However, the technique did not gain widespread recognition until 1994 when advances in computer technology enabled Vining et al. [2] to demonstrate the feasibility of using volumetric CT data to generate a three-dimensional, endoluminal reconstruction—“virtual colonoscopy”. Since then, research relating to CT colonography (CTC) has continued apace, developing its implementation, interpretation and diagnostic performance. Consequently, CTC has grown from a novel technique practised in a handful of specialist academic centres to one that has widely surpassed the barium enema as the preferred colorectal imaging modality in radiological departments. This chapter charts the evolution of CTC over the last 17 years, focusing in particular on research that has shaped current practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Coin CG, Wollett FC, Coin JT, Rowland M, DeRamos RK, Dandrea R. Computerized radiology of the colon: a potential screening technique. Comput Radiol. 1983;7(4):215–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Vining DJ, Gelfand DW, Bechtold RE, et al. Technical feasibility of colon imaging with helical CT and virtual reality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;162(S):1.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Steine S, Stordahl A, Lunde OC, Loken K, Laerum E. Double-contrast barium enema versus colonoscopy in the diagnosis of neoplastic disorders: aspects of decision-making in general practice. Fam Pract. 1993;10(3):288–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rex DK, Rahmani EY, Haseman JH, Lemmel GT, Kaster S, Buckley JS. Relative sensitivity of colonoscopy and barium enema for detection of colorectal cancer in clinical practice. Gastroenterology. 1997;112(1):17–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Halligan S, Marshall M, Taylor S, et al. Observer variation in the detection of colorectal neoplasia on double-contrast barium enema: implications for colorectal cancer screening and training. Clin Radiol. 2003;58(12):948–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Glick S. Double-contrast barium enema for colorectal cancer screening: a review of the issues and a comparison with other screening alternatives. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174(6):1529–37.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Winawer SJ, Stewart ET, Zauber AG, et al. A comparison of colonoscopy and double-contrast barium enema for surveillance after polypectomy. National Polyp Study Work Group. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(24):1766–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fletcher RH. The end of barium enemas? N Engl J Med. 2000;342(24):1823–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Levine MS, Glick SN, Rubesin SE, Laufer I. Double-contrast barium enema examination and colorectal cancer: a plea for radiologic screening. Radiology. 2002;222(2):313–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fink M, Freeman AH, Dixon AK, Coni NK. Computed tomography of the colon in elderly people. BMJ. 1994;308(6935):1018.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dixon AK, Freeman AH, Coni NK. CT of the colon in frail elderly patients. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 1995;16(2):165–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Amin Z, Boulos PB, Lees WR. Technical report: spiral CT pneumocolon for suspected colonic neoplasms. Clin Radiol. 1996;51(1):56–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Harvey CJ, Renfrew I, Taylor S, Gillams AR, Lees WR. Spiral CT pneumocolon: applications, status and limitations. Eur Radiol. 2001;11(9):1612–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen SC, Lu DS, Hecht JR, Kadell BM. CT colonography: value of scanning in both the supine and prone positions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172(3):595–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rogalla P, Meiri N, Ruckert JC, Hamm B. Colonography using multislice CT. Eur J Radiol. 2000;36(2):81–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Morrin MM, Farrell RJ, Kruskal JB, Reynolds K, McGee JB, Raptopoulos V. Utility of intravenously administered contrast material at CT colonography. Radiology. 2000;217(3):765–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Yee J, Hung RK, Akerkar GA, Wall SD. The usefulness of glucagon hydrochloride for colonic distention in CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173(1):169–72.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Morrin MM, Farrell RJ, Keogan MT, Kruskal JB, Yam C-S, Raptopoulos V. CT colonography: colonic distention improved by dual positioning but not intravenous glucagon. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(3):525–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Macari M, Lavelle M, Pedrosa I, et al. Effect of different bowel preparations on residual fluid at CT colonography. Radiology. 2001;218(1):274–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Zalis ME, Hahn PF. Digital subtraction bowel cleansing in CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(3):646–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Fletcher JG, Johnson CD, Welch TJ, et al. Optimization of CT colonography technique: prospective trial in 180 patients. Radiology. 2000;216(3):704–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Callstrom MR, Johnson CD, Fletcher JG, et al. CT colonography without cathartic preparation: feasibility study. Radiology. 2001;219(3):693–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Beaulieu CF, Napel S, Daniel BL, et al. Detection of colonic polyps in a phantom model: implications for virtual colonoscopy data acquisition. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998;22(4):656–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Dachman AH, Lieberman J, Osnis RB, et al. Small simulated polyps in pig colon: sensitivity of CT virtual colography. Radiology. 1997;203(2):427–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Bartram CI, et al. Multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of collimation, pitch, and orientation on polyp detection in a human colectomy specimen. Radiology. 2003;229(1):109–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, et al. Reducing data size and radiation dose for CT colonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(5):1181–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Fenlon HM, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. Virtual colonoscopy: imaging features with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;170(5):1303–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE. Colorectal lesions: evaluation with CT colography. Radiographics. 1997;17(5):1157–67.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. Colorectal neoplasm detection using virtual colonoscopy: a feasibility study. Gut. 1998;43(6):806–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Royster AP, Fenlon HM, Clarke PD, Nunes DP, Ferrucci JT. CT colonoscopy of colorectal neoplasms: two-dimensional and three-dimensional virtual-reality techniques with colonoscopic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(5):1237–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Dachman AH, Kuniyoshi JK, Boyle CM, et al. CT colonography with three-dimensional problem solving for detection of colonic polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171(4):989–95.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hara AK, Johnson CD, Reed JE, et al. Detection of colorectal polyps with CT colography: initial assessment of sensitivity and specificity. Radiology. 1997;205(1):59–65.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Yee J, Kumar NN, Hung RK, Akerkar GA, Kumar PR, Wall SD. Comparison of supine and prone scanning separately and in combination at CT colonography. Radiology. 2003;226(3):653–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Fenlon HM, Ferrucci JT. First international symposium on virtual colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173(3):565–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Johnson CD, Hara AK, Reed JE. Virtual endoscopy: what’s in a name? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171(5):1201–2.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Fenlon HM, Nunes DP, Schroy III PC, Barish MA, Clarke PD, Ferrucci JT. A comparison of virtual and conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal polyps. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(20):1496–503.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Halligan S, Fenlon HM. Virtual colonoscopy. BMJ. 1999;319(7219):1249–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Laghi A, Catalano C, Panebianco V, Iannaccone R, Iori S, Passariello R. [Optimization of the technique of virtual colonoscopy using a multislice spiral computerized tomography]. Radiol Med. 2000;100(6):459–64.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Mangiapane F, Piacentini F, Iori S, Passariello R. Experimental colonic phantom for the evaluation of the optimal scanning technique for CT colonography using a multidetector spiral CT equipment. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(3):459–66.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Rogalla P, Meiri N. CT colonography: data acquisition and patient preparation techniques. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2001;22(5):405–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Robinson P, Burnett H, Nicholson DA. The use of minimal preparation computed tomography for the primary investigation of colon cancer in frail or elderly patients. Clin Radiol. 2002;57(5):389–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Goh V, Morley S, Atkin W, Bartram CI. Optimizing bowel preparation for multidetector row CT colonography: effect of Citramag and Picolax. Clin Radiol. 2003;58(9):723–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Goh V, et al. Optimizing colonic distention for multi-detector row CT colonography: effect of hyoscine butylbromide and rectal balloon catheter. Radiology. 2003;229(1):99–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IW, et al. CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology. 2002;224(1):25–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Detection of colorectal lesions: lower-dose multi-detector row helical CT colonography compared with conventional colonoscopy. Radiology. 2003;229(3):775–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Svensson MH, Svensson E, Lasson A, Hellstrom M. Patient acceptance of CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy: prospective comparative study in patients with or suspected of having colorectal disease. Radiology. 2002;222(2):337–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Saunders BP, Bassett P, Vance M, Bartram CI. Acceptance by patients of multidetector CT colonography compared with barium enema examinations, flexible sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(4):913–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Lefere PA, Gryspeerdt SS, Dewyspelaere J, Baekelandt M, Van Holsbeeck BG. Dietary fecal tagging as a cleansing method before CT colonography: initial results polyp detection and patient acceptance. Radiology. 2002;224(2):393–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Gluecker TM, Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, et al. Colorectal cancer screening with CT colonography, colonoscopy, and double-contrast barium enema examination: prospective assessment of patient perceptions and preferences. Radiology. 2003;227(2):378–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Thomeer M, Bielen D, Vanbeckevoort D, et al. Patient acceptance for CT colonography: what is the real issue? Eur Radiol. 2002;12(6):1410–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Iannaccone R, Laghi A, Catalano C, et al. Computed tomographic colonography without cathartic preparation for the detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology. 2004;127(5):1300–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology CT Colonography Study Group Investigators. Effect of directed training on reader performance for CT colonography: multicenter study. Radiology. 2007;242(1):152–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Burling D, Halligan S, Altman DG, et al. CT colonography interpretation times: effect of reader experience, fatigue, and scan findings in a multi-centre setting. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(8):1745–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Burling D, Halligan S, Altman DG, et al. Polyp measurement and size categorisation by CT colonography: effect of observer experience in a multi-centre setting. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(8):1737–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Laghi A, Iannaccone R, Carbone I, et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): blinded prospective comparison with conventional colonoscopy for the detection of colorectal neoplasia. Endoscopy. 2002;34(6):441–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Vance M, Windsor A, Atkin W, Bartram CI. Use of multidetector-row computed tomographic colonography before flexible sigmoidoscopy in the investigation of rectal bleeding. Br J Surg. 2003;90(9):1163–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Van Gelder RE, Nio CY, Florie J, et al. Computed tomographic colonography compared with colonoscopy in patients at increased risk for colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2004;127(1):41–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Neri E, Giusti P, Battolla L, et al. Colorectal cancer: role of CT colonography in preoperative evaluation after incomplete colonoscopy. Radiology. 2002;223(3):615–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Halligan S, Altman DG, Taylor SA, et al. CT colonography in the detection of colorectal polyps and cancer: systematic review, meta-analysis, and proposed minimum data set for study level reporting. Radiology. 2005;237(3):893–904.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Yee J, Akerkar GA, Hung RK, Steinauer-Gebauer AM, Wall SD, McQuaid KR. Colorectal neoplasia: performance characteristics of CT colonography for detection in 300 patients. Radiology. 2001;219(3):685–92.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Macari M, Bini EJ, Xue X, et al. Colorectal neoplasms: prospective comparison of thin-section low-dose multi-detector row CT colonography and conventional colonoscopy for detection. Radiology. 2002;224(2):383–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Pickhardt PJ, Choi JR, Hwang I, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy to screen for colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic adults. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(23):2191–200.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Johnson CD, Harmsen WS, Wilson LA, et al. Prospective blinded evaluation of computed tomographic colonography for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Gastroenterology. 2003;125(2):311–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Cotton PB, Durkalski VL, Pineau BC, et al. Computed tomographic colonography (virtual colonoscopy): a multicenter comparison with standard colonoscopy for detection of colorectal neoplasia. JAMA. 2004;291(14):1713–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Rockey DC, Paulson E, Niedzwiecki D, et al. Analysis of air contrast barium enema, computed tomographic colonography, and colonoscopy: prospective comparison. Lancet. 2005;365(9456):305–11.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Barish MA, Soto JA, Ferrucci JT. Consensus on current clinical practice of virtual colonoscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184(3):786–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Zalis ME, Barish MA, Choi JR, et al. CT colonography reporting and data system: a consensus proposal. Radiology. 2005;236(1):3–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Taylor SA, Laghi A, Lefere P, Halligan S, Stoker J. European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR): consensus statement on CT colonography. Eur Radiol. 2007;17(2):575–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Position of the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute on computed tomographic colonography. Gastroenterology. 2006;131(5):1627–8.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Burling D. CT colonography standards. Clin Radiol. 2010;65(6):474–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Burling D, Halligan S, Taylor SA, Usiskin S, Bartram CI. CT colonography practice in the UK: a national survey. Clin Radiol. 2004;59(1):39–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Spinzi G, Belloni G, Martegani A, Sangiovanni A, Del Favero C, Minoli G. Computed tomographic colonography and conventional colonoscopy for colon diseases: a prospective, blinded study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2001;96(2):394–400.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Soto JA, Barish MA, Yee J. Reader training in CT colonography: how much is enough? Radiology. 2005;237(1):26–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Burling D, et al. CT colonography: effect of experience and training on reader performance. Eur Radiol. 2004;14(6):1025–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. McFarland EG, Fletcher JG, Pickhardt P, et al. ACR Colon Cancer Committee white paper: status of CT colonography 2009. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6(11):756–72.e4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Rockey DC, Barish M, Brill JV, et al. Standards for gastroenterologists for performing and interpreting diagnostic computed tomographic colonography. Gastroenterology. 2007;133(3):1005–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Boone D, Halligan S, Frost R, et al. CT colonography: who attends training? A survey of participants at educational workshops. Clin Radiol. 2011;66(6):510–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Johnson CD, Chen MH, Toledano AY, et al. Accuracy of CT colonography for detection of large adenomas and cancers. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(12):1207–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Macari M, Milano A, Lavelle M, Berman P, Megibow AJ. Comparison of time-efficient CT colonography with two- and three-dimensional colonic evaluation for detecting colorectal polyps. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;174(6):1543–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Pickhardt PJ. Three-dimensional endoluminal CT colonography (virtual colonoscopy): comparison of three commercially available systems. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(6):1599–606.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Lenhart DK, Babb J, Bonavita J, et al. Comparison of a unidirectional panoramic 3D endoluminal interpretation technique to traditional 2D and bidirectional 3D interpretation techniques at CT colonography: preliminary observations. Clin Radiol. 2010;65(2):118–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Summers RM, Beaulieu CF, Pusanik LM, et al. Automated polyp detector for CT colonography: feasibility study. Radiology. 2000;216(1):284–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Summers RM, Johnson CD, Pusanik LM, Malley JD, Youssef AM, Reed JE. Automated polyp detection at CT colonography: feasibility assessment in a human population. Radiology. 2001;219(1):51–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Yoshida H, Nappi J. Three-dimensional computer-aided diagnosis scheme for detection of colonic polyps. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2001;20(12):1261–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Summers RM, Jerebko AK, Franaszek M, Malley JD, Johnson CD. Colonic polyps: complementary role of computer-aided detection in CT colonography. Radiology. 2002;225(2):391–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Summers RM, Yao J, Pickhardt PJ, et al. Computed tomographic virtual colonoscopy computer-aided polyp detection in a screening population. Gastroenterology. 2005;129(6):1832–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Taylor SA, Robinson C, Boone D, Honeyfield L, Halligan S. Polyp characteristics correctly annotated by computer-aided detection software but ignored by reporting radiologists during CT colonography. Radiology. 2009;253(3):715–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Taylor SA, Halligan S, Slater A, et al. Polyp detection with CT colonography: primary 3D endoluminal analysis versus primary 2D transverse analysis with computer-assisted reader software. Radiology. 2006;239(3):759–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Dachman AH, Obuchowski NA, Hoffmeister JW, et al. Effect of computer-aided detection for CT colonography in a multireader, multicase trial. Radiology. 2010;256(3):827–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Halligan S, Mallett S, Altman DG, et al. Incremental benefit of computer-aided detection when used as a second and concurrent reader of CT colonographic data: multiobserver study. Radiology. 2011;258(2):469–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Atkin WS, Edwards R, Kralj-Hans I, et al. Once-only flexible sigmoidoscopy screening in prevention of colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375(9726):1624–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Seeff LC, Nadel MR, Klabunde CN, et al. Patterns and predictors of colorectal cancer test use in the adult U.S. population. Cancer. 2004;100(10):2093–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Ristvedt SL, McFarland EG, Weinstock LB, Thyssen EP. Patient preferences for CT colonography, conventional colonoscopy, and bowel preparation. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98(3):578–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. van Gelder RE, Birnie E, Florie J, et al. CT colonography and colonoscopy: assessment of patient preference in a 5-week follow-up study. Radiology. 2004;233(2):328–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Von Wagner C, Halligan S, Atkin WS, Lilford RJ, Morton D, Wardle J. Choosing between CT colonography and colonoscopy in the diagnostic context: a qualitative study of influences on patient preferences. Health Expect. 2009;12(1):18–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Moawad FJ, Maydonovitch CL, Cullen PA, Barlow DS, Jenson DW, Cash BD. CT colonography may improve colorectal cancer screening compliance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(5):1118–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Gryspeerdt S, Lefere P, Dewyspelaere J, Baekelandt M, van Holsbeeck B. Optimisation of colon cleansing prior to computed tomographic colonography. JBR-BTR. 2002;85(6):289–96.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Zalis ME, Perumpillichira JJ, Magee C, Kohlberg G, Hahn PF. Tagging-based, electronically cleansed CT colonography: evaluation of patient comfort and image readability. Radiology. 2006;239(1):149–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Bielen D, Thomeer M, Vanbeckevoort D, et al. Dry preparation for virtual CT colonography with fecal tagging using water-soluble contrast medium: initial results. Eur Radiol. 2003;13(3):453–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Thomeer M, Carbone I, Bosmans H, et al. Stool tagging applied in thin-slice multidetector computed tomography colonography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003;27(2):132–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Lefere P, Gryspeerdt S, Marrannes J, Baekelandt M, Van Holsbeeck B. CT colonography after fecal tagging with a reduced cathartic cleansing and a reduced volume of barium. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184(6):1836–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Taylor SA, Slater A, Burling DN, et al. CT colonography: optimisation, diagnostic performance and patient acceptability of reduced-laxative regimens using barium-based faecal tagging. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(1):32–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Jensch S, de Vries AH, Peringa J, et al. CT colonography with limited bowel preparation: performance characteristics in an increased-risk population. Radiology. 2008;247(1):122–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Nagata K, Okawa T, Honma A, Endo S, Kudo SE, Yoshida H. Full-laxative versus minimum-laxative fecal-tagging CT colonography using 64-detector row CT: prospective blinded comparison of diagnostic performance, tagging quality, and patient acceptance. Acad Radiol. 2009;16(7):780–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Johnson CD, MacCarty RL, Welch TJ, et al. Comparison of the relative sensitivity of CT colonography and double-contrast barium enema for screen detection of colorectal polyps. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;2(4):314–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Dhruva SS, Phurrough SE, Salive ME, Redberg RF. CMS’s landmark decision on CT colonography – examining the relevant data. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(26):2699–701.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Garg S, Ahnen DJ. Is computed tomographic colonography being held to a higher standard? Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(3):178–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Halligan S, Lilford RJ, Wardle J, et al. Design of a multicentre randomized trial to evaluate CT colonography versus colonoscopy or barium enema for diagnosis of colonic cancer in older symptomatic patients: the SIGGAR study. Trials. 2007;8:32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Taylor S, Halligan S, Atkin W, et al. Clinical trials and experiences: SIGGAR. Presented at the 11th international symposium on virtual colonoscopy Westin Copley Place, Boston, MA, 25–27 Oct 2010; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Halligan S, Waddingham J, Dadswell E, Wooldrage K, Atkin W, SIGGAR Trial Investigators. Detection of extracolonic lesions by CTC in symptomatic patients: their frequency and severity in a randomised controlled trial. Eur Radiol. 2010;20 Suppl 1:S8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Medical Imaging, University College Hospital, London, UK

    Darren Boone M.B.B.S., Stuart A. Taylor M.B.B.S., M.D. & Steve Halligan M.B.B.S., M.D.

Authors
  1. Darren Boone M.B.B.S.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stuart A. Taylor M.B.B.S., M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steve Halligan M.B.B.S., M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stuart A. Taylor M.B.B.S., M.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology, Walter Reed National Military, 8901 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, 20889, Maryland, USA

    Brooks D. Cash

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Boone, D., Taylor, S.A., Halligan, S. (2013). CTC Background and Development. In: Cash, B. (eds) Colorectal Cancer Screening and Computerized Tomographic Colonography. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5943-9_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5943-9_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-5942-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-5943-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation